| April 8, 2003 | Tuesday | Safar 5, 1424 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
The looming disaster
Literacy constraints
IT is unfortunate that it should have taken a third country to tell India that there is no parallel between Kashmir and Iraq. That the corrective should have come from Washington must be all the more galling for New Delhi, which has been trying for quite some time to secure the former’s support or tacit approval for a “pre-emptive strike” against Pakistan on the plea of “cross-border terrorism”. On Friday, the State Department spokesperson said India must not use the US-led strike against Iraq as a pretext for an attack on Pakistan. Her exact words were, “Any attempts to draw parallels between the Iraq and Kashmir situations are wrong and are overwhelmed by the differences between them”. The rebuttal came in the wake of a series of warnings from Mr Yashwant Sinha, India’s superhawk foreign minister, that India would launch a pre-emptive strike against Pakistan because of the latter’s support for “terrorism” in occupied Kashmir. The American assertion that the parallels between the two situations are “overwhelmed” by the differences setting them apart is emphatic and deserves to be noted.
The first and foremost difference is one of moral principles as derived from those of the United Nations and from the fact of the world body’s involvement with the dispute for more than half a century. Basically, there is only one issue in Kashmir — the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination. This right is enshrined in the UN Charter not only as a principle of universal applicability; in the case of Kashmir it flows directly from the specific Security Council resolutions which affirmed that this dispute was to be resolved with reference to the freely expressed will of the people of Kashmir with regard to their future. Secondly, it is India itself that had taken the Kashmir dispute to the UN as an “aggrieved party”. Thirdly, on more than one occasion, Indian diplomats and leaders, including India’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, pledged in no uncertain terms that the Kashmir dispute would be decided through a plebiscite. This principle still remains the promised determinant and not all the stage-managed elections India has held in the occupied state can supplant it. In Iraq, there is no moral or territorial dispute, and the UN is not involved, because the US and Britain have bypassed the world body. It is an attack on a sovereign country in defiance of world opinion, and its aim is regime change and monopolization of Iraq’s oil wealth. No parallel thus exists between Iraq and Kashmir.
As for “terrorism”, the world does not accept the Indian view of Kashmir being a simple case of terrorism. The Kashmiris’ freedom struggle is genuine. It exploded into full fury nearly one and a half decades ago, and it continues unabated. No foreign support or encouragement could sustain such a long struggle if it were not indigenous. As for some religious enthusiasts who might have somehow become involved in it, Pakistan has taken steps to keep such elements in check. Islamabad has also made it repeatedly clear that it would not allow Pakistan’s soil to be used for terrorism against any country. It has been widely acknowledged that Pakistan has taken effective steps to check the infiltration of religious militants into occupied Kashmir. Islamabad has also proposed the stationing of UN observers, or monitors from neutral countries, along the Line of Control to check the possibility of infiltration. Strangely enough, India has remained firmly opposed to any such step. As for other differences between the two situations, it should be obvious to the meanest intelligence that the power equation between Pakistan and India is not the same as that between Iraq and the US.
AS the final assault on Baghdad gets underway, UN agencies are warning of a terrible health disaster in the days ahead. The World Health Organization is bracing itself for a rapid deterioration in the health situation in the city and urgently calling for help. The relentless bombardment by US warplanes has not only caused heavy civilian casualties but has also damaged vital infrastructure. The already overstretched health system is now close to collapse because of the rate at which injured people are coming to hospitals for treatment. According to the International Red Cross, it is becoming impossible to keep count of the number of dead and injured arriving at the city’s hospitals. On Sunday, at the height of the bombardment, some 100 people an hour were being brought to various hospitals. Not only are the staff working round the clock under the most appalling conditions but vital medicines are rapidly running out. With the city under virtual siege and many key bridges blown up, it is virtually impossible to replenish stocks.
The Iraqi health system, already seriously undermined by years of sanctions, is now in a collapsing state. The damage to infrastructure is also hampering relief efforts and creating numerous other problems. For example, it is no longer possible to maintain power stations, which means that water supplies are also under threat. With the fighting likely to intensify in the next few days, matters can only get infinitely worse. It is difficult to see how relief and humanitarian operations can continue under the circumstances. When this terrible war finally comes to an end it will leave behind a terrible legacy of death and suffering compounded by the failure and inadequacy of health and humanitarian efforts. Whatever the future political shape of Iraq, it is important that the relief and rehabilitation efforts are kept out of political considerations of the moment or the exigencies of the war. Despite deep suspicion of its role in certain coalition quarters, the UN alone is equipped to deal with the massive problems of post-war Iraq. It must be allowed to oversee this process and not impeded by those who harbour deep prejudices against the world body.
THE disclosure made at the International Partners Forum in Islamabad the other day about growing illiteracy in the country makes dismal reading. The meeting was informed that the number of illiterates had risen from 10 million in 1950 to 50 million at present. This is a far cry from the ambitious target of achieving 70 per cent literacy by 2004. The meeting was informed that Pakistan was facing a shortfall of Rs 253 billion under the national plan of action ‘Education For All’. Worries over insufficiency of funds are understandable, but the key question is whether a conducive environment has been created to facilitate the implementation of the plan. The drop-out rate at the primary level remains very high and the less said about community participation the better. Notwithstanding the growing stress on gender equality, educational opportunities for women are far from adequate. The Women’s Literacy for Empowerment Project aimed at making 1.1 million women functionally literate through a one-year cycle in 30,000 centres during 2002-2003. Not more than 15 per cent of such units have come up so far, however.
Non-formal education, constituting an important literacy mode, has not been made fully functional. Nor is adult literacy making any headway in the absence of proper arrangements at the grassroots level. Rising poverty levels have rendered the task increasingly more difficult. Broad participation of key actors like the provincial governments, donor agencies and NGOs in literacy promotion is an important requirement of a viable, multipronged drive to tackle illiteracy. However, since literacy promotion is essentially a provincial subject, it is necessary to effectively coordinate efforts at this particular level to build the necessary thrust and momentum for the task in hand.